i

FOREIGN AGRICULTURAL SERVICE

Food Assistance Division Office of Capacity Building and Development

FY 2018 Food Assistance Notice of Funding Opportunity

Food for Progress (FFPr)

December 7, 2017

ii

This page is left blank intentionally for formatting purposes

iii

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) SUBMISSION DEADLINE: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST) SUBMISSION EMAIL: FFPrSubmissions2018@fas.usda.gov FUNDING OPPORTUNITY NUMBER: USDA-FAS-FFPR-18 ANTICIPATED AWARD TYPE: Cooperative Agreement CATALOG OF FEDERAL DOMESTIC ASSISTANCE (CFDA) NUMBER: 10.606 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) expects to make multiple 4-5 year awards, totaling up to $155 million. FAS has prioritized the following countries and regions: Andean and Central American Region (Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Peru), Cambodia, Egypt, Georgia, Kenya, Pakistan, the Philippines, and Tunisia. FAS will also review submissions for non-prioritized countries, regions, and sectors. The Food for Progress (FFPr) program aims to improve agricultural production and expand trade of agricultural products in developing countries. This program provides for the donation of U.S. agricultural commodities as well as financial and technical assistance to carry out programs with these goals. Programs are primarily funded through the sale of these donated commodities within the foreign market where the program is implemented. Some examples of past projects have included: training farmers in improved animal and plant production, establishing and building capacity of agricultural cooperatives, providing microfinance to farmers, and developing agricultural value chains. This Notice of Funding Opportunity announcement is the first phase of a two-step approach for fiscal year 2018, wherein entities present submissions that outline strategic analyses and intervention strategies to address specific country needs. Eligible entities with the highest-rated submissions will be invited to present a full application in the second phase. Private voluntary organizations, nonprofit agricultural organizations or cooperatives, nongovernmental organizations, or any other private entities are eligible to apply. Public universities, including their subsidiaries, are not eligible to apply.

iv

LIST OF ACRONYMS

ACDA Agricultural Cooperatives Development Agency (Georgia) BFAR Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (Philippines) CFDA Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance CFR Code of Federal Regulations CIA Central Intelligence Agency DCFTA Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas DTI Department of Trade and Industry (Philippines) EU European Union EST Eastern Standard Time FA Fisheries Association (Tunisia) FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FAIS Food Aid Information System FAS Foreign Agricultural Service FDB Fisheries Development Board (Pakistan) FFPr Food for Progress FtF Feed the Future FY Fiscal Year GDP Gross Domestic Product GFSS Global Food Security Strategy GOG Government of Georgia GOK Government of Kenya GOT Government of Tunisia HAACP Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point HVH High Value Horticulture LGU Local Government Unit M & E Monitoring and Evaluation MT Metric Tons NCPB National Cereals and Produce Board (Kenya) NFSA National Food Safety Authority (Egypt) NGO Non-Governmental Organization OECD Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development OMB Office of Management and Budget PARC Pakistan Agricultural Research Council PL Public Law PP Program Participant RF Results Framework R&R Rehabilitation and Renovation RGC Royal Government of Cambodia SAM System for Award Management SME Small and Medium-Sized Enterprise SPS Sanitary and Phytosanitary USAID United States Agency for International Development USC United States Code USDA United States Department of Agriculture USG United States Government

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary………………………………………………………………………………………..iii

List of Acronyms…………………………………………………………………………………………..iv

PART I – PROGRAM DESCRIPTION……………………………………………………………………1

A. Authority…………………………………………………………………………………………...1 B. Program Background and Objectives……………………………………………………………...1 C. Purpose of Funding………………………………………………………………………………...1 D. Priority Countries, Sectors, and Regions…………………………………………………………..2

PART II – FEDERAL AWARD INFORMATION ……….……………………………………………....2

A. Two-Step Process………………………………………………………………………………….2 B. Address to Request Submission Package………………………………………………………….3 C. Type of Award……………………………………………………………………………..………3 1. Substantial Involvement…………………………………………………………………………....3 2. Existing and New Applicants……………………………………………………………………....3 3. Expected Funding Amount................................................................................................................3 4. Estimated Award Size........................................................................................................................3 5. Expected Number of Awards……………………………………………………………………….4 6. Anticipated Start Date………………………………………………………………………………4 7. Period of Performance………………………………………………………………………...……4

PART III – ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION……………………………………………………………...4

A. Eligible Entities ……………………………………………………………………………………4 1. Suspension and Debarment……………………………………………………….…………….....4 2. Conflict of Interest Requirements………………………………………………………………....4 B. Cost Sharing……………………………………………………………………………………….4

PART IV – CONTENT AND FORM OF SUBMISSION…………………………………………………5 A. Criteria …………………………………………………………………………………………….5

• Length……………………………………………………………………………………..5 • Project Summary…………………………………………………………………………..5 • Strategic Analysis………………………………………………………………………....5 • Technical Expertise………………………………………………………………………..5 • Project Cost………………………………………………………………………………..5 • Commodity Monetization…………………………………………………………………5 • Sustainability and Lasting Impact…………………………………………………………6 • Proposed Activities………………………………………………………………………..6 • Project Level Results Framework…………………………………………………………6

B. Submission Deadlines………………………………………………………………….…………..6 C. Other Submission Requirements………………………………………………………………......6

vi

PART V – ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION………………………………………………………..6 A. Selection Notices………………………………………………………………………..................6 B. Administrative Standards and Provisions…………………………………………………….........7

PART VI – AGENCY CONTACT ............................................................................................... 8

APPENDIX A – PRIORITY COUNTRIES AND REGIONS GUIDANCE……………………………....9

• Andean and Central American Region (Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Peru)……………………………………………………………………………………….......9

• Cambodia…………………………………………………………………………………………12 • Egypt……………………………………………………………………………………………...14 • Republic of Georgia………………………………………………………………………………16 • Kenya……………………………………………………………………………………………..18 • Pakistan…………………………………………………………………………………………...20 • The Philippines…………………………………………………………………………………...22 • Tunisia…………………………………………………………………………………………….24

APPENDIX B – FOOD FOR PROGRESS RESULTS FRAMEWORKS……………………………......26

1

PART I – PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

A. Authority

The Food for Progress (FFPr) Program is authorized in section 1100 of the Food for Progress Act of 1985, as amended.

B. Program Description and Objectives

The FFPr program has two principal objectives: to improve agricultural productivity and to expand trade of agricultural products. The FFPr program provides for the donation of U.S. agricultural commodities to developing countries and emerging democracies committed to introducing and expanding free enterprise in the agricultural sector. The commodities are generally sold on the local market and the proceeds are used to support agricultural development activities.

The Global Food Security Act of 2016 and corresponding U.S. Government Global Food Security Strategy (GFSS) affirms the United States’ commitment to ending global hunger, poverty, and child malnutrition. Where appropriate, entities are strongly encouraged to align proposed interventions with the objectives found in the GFSS and required to ensure that proposed activities are complementary and not duplicative.

C. Purpose of Funding

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) submits a Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for its Fiscal Year 2018 FFPr. Priority countries and regions are noted in Appendix A – Priority Countries and Regions Guidance of this announcement. In addition, FAS will give priority consideration to submissions that (1) expand domestic, regional, or international markets and trade through private sector participation, (2) leverage public or private sector resources in order to achieve lasting impact and (3) offer weather resilient solutions in the activities. Participation of the private sector, leveraging of public and private sector resources, and use of weather resiliency solutions will reinforce the sustainability of the FFPr programs. Sustainability is a priority for FAS, as it supports USDA’s efforts to end extreme poverty and reduce food insecurity.

2

D. Priority Countries, Sectors, and Regions

The following table outlines the priority countries and relevant priority sectors.

Country Priority Sectors Priority Regions

Andean and Central American Region (Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Peru)

Cacao, Coffee Cacao and coffee producing and processing regions in each priority country

Cambodia Aquaculture Regions of Cambodia conducive to freshwater fish farming

Egypt Aquaculture, Food Safety

Regions around the Nile River conducive to fish farming, and nationwide coverage for the Food Safety sector

Republic of Georgia Dairy, Beef Regions of Georgia conducive to dairy and beef production

Kenya Irrigation, Post-Harvest Storage

Regions of Kenya conducive to agricultural irrigation improvements, and improved post-harvest storage

Pakistan Aquaculture, Livestock Feed

Regions of Pakistan conducive to marine and freshwater fish (including shellfish and mollusk) production and regions with potential to improve the livestock feed sector

The Philippines Aquaculture, Coffee

Regions of the Philippines conducive to fish farming and regions with existing coffee production with potential for increased production

Tunisia Aquaculture, Citrus

Regions of Tunisia conducive to freshwater fish farming and citrus production

PART II – FEDERAL AWARD INFORMATION

A. Two-Step Process

For fiscal year 2018, FAS is implementing a two-step process as part of the Notice of Funding Opportunity. This document reflects Phase One of the process, during which time FAS will review submissions from eligible entities and evaluate them based on the factors listed below. Entities with the highest-rated submissions will be invited to present a full application for the second phase that will be rated by a supplemental panel review. The deadline for these submissions will be announced with the

3

invitation to submit a full application. FAS will invite comments from other U.S. government agencies on its award recommendations, but FAS will make the final determination about which applications to fund.

B. Address to Request Submission Package

This announcement contains all instructions required to complete the submission, which can be found on the Food Aid Information System (FAIS) homepage and on www.Grants.gov. If you do not have access to the internet or are having trouble accessing the homepage, please contact USDA at (202) 720-4221 to request these documents via mail.

C. Type of Award

1. Substantial Involvement

All final awards will be made in the form of cooperative agreements. In a cooperative agreement, FAS will be substantially involved throughout the award. Substantial involvement may include, but is not limited to the following:

• FAS specifies the manner, method, performance, or timing of the work in an approved work plan; • FAS review and approval of an evaluation plan; • FAS review and approval of a monetization plan, if applicable; • FAS review and approval of proposed sub-grants and contracts, prior to award; • FAS participation in the selection and approval of the individuals or organizations that will

conduct all required evaluations; • FAS participation in data collection and analysis for required evaluations and other performance

reports; • FAS approval of an organizational chart identifying the names, roles, and responsibilities of all of

the participant’s key personnel and any subsequent changes or absences; and • FAS provides specific direction or redirection of the work during the period of performance, in

reviewing and approving the annual work plans, budget narratives, agreement indicators, evaluations and any changes to the agreement scope and objectives.

2. Existing and New Applicants

FAS will consider awarding proposals from all eligible organizations, including current Program Participants (PP) and new organizations for both new and existing projects.

3. Expected Funding Amount FFPr expects to issue awards with a total value of $155 million, which includes a maximum of $40 million for transportation costs. The project budget of each award depends on estimated freight and commodity costs.

4. Estimated Award Size FAS anticipates FFPr award budgets to range $10-$35 million for the full duration of the project. This value reflects the operating budget for a proposed cooperative agreement, which is based on the anticipated monetization proceeds and any administrative funds requested by the recipient.

4

5. Expected Number of Awards FAS expects to make 6-8 FFPr awards.

6. Anticipated Start Date Funded projects are anticipated to start in September 2018.

7. Period of Performance For new programming, FAS seeks submissions for implementation over a 4- to 5-year period.

PART III – ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. Eligible Entities Pursuant to 7 CFR 1499.3, a private voluntary organization, a nonprofit agricultural organization or cooperative, a nongovernmental organization (NGO), or any other private entity is eligible to submit an application to become a recipient under the FFPr. Public universities, including their subsidiaries, are not eligible to apply. 1. Suspension and Debarment

An entity (including subcontractors/sub-recipients) will be considered ineligible if they have been designated by the U.S. Government as debarred or suspended in procurements funded by the United States Federal Government or otherwise prohibited by applicable United States law or executive order or United States policies. USDA will review inter alia:

i. U.S. State Department, Terrorist Exclusion List: http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123086.htm

ii. U.S. Department of Treasury, Specially Designated Nationals List: http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/SDN-List/Pages/default.aspx

iii. General Services Administration, System for Award Management (SAM): http://www.sam.gov

2. Conflict of Interest Requirements All entities with submissions, recipients, and subrecipients must comply with the conflict of interest requirements located in 2 CFR 200.112.

B. Cost Sharing This program has neither statutory formula nor matching requirements.

5

PART IV – CONTENT AND FORM OF SUBMISSION

A. Criteria

All submissions for Phase One of the Notice of Funding Opportunity will be reviewed against the criteria listed below.

Criteria Adherence to Submission Guidance

Project Summary Strategic Analysis

Technical Expertise Project Cost

Commodity Monetization Sustainability and Lasting Impact

Proposed Activities Project-Level Results Frameworks

Please refer to the following guidance for each criteria area.

• Submission Guidance: The maximum length is 15 pages, including all attachments. All submissions must use size 11 Times New Roman font. Where appropriate, submissions must include cited sources as footnotes. Submissions must be concise and well-written.

• Project Summary: Provide a one-paragraph summary of the proposed project. The summary should include the duration of the project, a description of intended direct beneficiaries, and summary of the intervention.

• Strategic Analysis: The submission must include a comprehensive strategic analysis, which details the existing needs, challenges, value chain sector opportunities, and constraints that may impact the implementation of a project in the recipient country. The submission will be evaluated based on how well the project will coordinate with other stakeholders (host government, USG, other donors, private sector, etc.) and explain how the proposed program will complement and not duplicate their current activities. The strategic analysis should link the intervention to the described needs within the sector. Submissions should include a description of intended beneficiaries, the specific needs of the targeted population, and an explanation of how and why the specific geographical regions are targeted.

• Technical Expertise: The entity’s submission must demonstrate capability and proficiency in the targeted countries and sectors, which may include past experience working on programs of a similar scope and size.

• Project Cost: The submission must include an estimated range of costs of the project, based on the size and scope of the interventions. During Phase One, entities will not submit a budget summary or a breakdown of project costs.

• Commodity Monetization: The submission should acknowledge the intent to monetize commodities in order to fund project activities and the responsibilities of the entity to manage the sale of commodities. During Phase One, entities are not required to propose a commodity selection or a monetization plan, and if one is included it not be evaluated.

6

• Sustainability and Lasting Impact: Submissions should estimate a baseline, a general timeline, and proposed outcomes that would enable FAS to measure progress towards achieving its objectives. The submission should include information on how the proposed project will achieve sustainable, long-lasting results that extend past the project end date. Entities should explain how the activities will be implemented in a manner which will ensure sustainability, and how outcomes will be sustained after the project ends. This section should include a brief exit strategy for the project, and the submission should demonstrate how the project will work with public and private partners and show how they will develop buy-in from beneficiary groups and communities to ensure long-lasting, sustainable results. Submissions should also describe adequate incentives (monetary, political, and social) for actors and institutions to continue key activities.

• Proposed Activities: Submissions should include descriptions of activities, the steps included in implementation, and the anticipated completion date. This section should include a general description of the project interventions and how each will lead to the identified project-level results. It is important to show how the activities will address the needs as identified in the strategic analysis (see above – Section I – Introduction and Strategic Analysis). The activities should not only identify the project’s targeted response, but also show how it complements existing efforts by USDA, other agencies, donors, and public private partnerships.

• Project-Level Results Frameworks: The submission must include a Project-Level Results Framework (RF). A results framework is a graphical representation of the project’s theory of change, describing the cause-and-effect linkages outlined in the strategic analysis. The Project- Level RF must clearly identify and articulate how the proposed project will contribute to USDA Food Assistance Program results frameworks, as shown in Appendix B – Food for Progress Results Framework. The Project-Level RF must be accompanied by narrative text that identifies critical assumptions and describes the project’s theory of change, referring to existing research that supports the proposed causal linkages, where possible.

B. Submission Deadlines All submissions must be sent as a single PDF file to the email listed below. DO NOT submit a full proposal. All submissions are evaluated to ‘shortlist’ eligible entities that will be requested to submit a full proposal. The submission deadline is Wednesday, January 31, 2018 at 5:00 PM EST. Submissions received after this date and time will not be considered.

Email Address: FFPrSubmissions2018@fas.usda.gov

C. Other Submission Requirements All submissions must be submitted electronically as indicated above.

SECTION V – ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

A. Selection Notices Entities will be informed of the decision for invitation to second phase submission by email approximately 30 days after submission. A minimum of 60 days will then be provided for selected entities to submit a full proposal. These proposals will be due on or about April 30, 2018. Entities that

7

are invited to submit a full proposal may request documented feedback prior to submitting their full application. B. Administrative Standards and Provisions The cooperative agreements awarded under the FFPr are administered under 7 CFR Part 1499 and 2 CFR Part 200.

In addition, to the above regulations, recipients agree to comply with: • 2 CFR Part 25 - Universal Identifier and System for Award Management • 2 CFR Part 170 – Reporting Subaward and Executive Compensation Information • 2 CFR Part 175 – Award Term for Trafficking in Persons • 2 CFR Part 180 - OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Government-wide Debarment and Suspension

(Nonprocurement) • Appendix XII to 2 CFR Part 200—Award Term and Condition for Recipient Integrity and

Performance Matters • 2 CFR Part 400 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit

Requirements for Federal Awards • 2 CFR 415, subparts A and B – General Program Administrative Regulations • 2 CFR Part 416 – General Program Administrative Regulations for Grants and Cooperative

Agreements to State and Local Government • 2 CFR Part 417 – Nonprocurement Debarment and Suspension • 2 CFR Part 418 – New Restrictions on Lobbying • 2 CFR Part 421 – Requirements for a Drug-Free Workplace (Financial Assistance) • 2 CFR Part 422 – Research Institutions Conducting USDA funded Extramural Research;

Research Misconduct • 7 CFR Part 1, subpart A – USDA implementation of the Freedom of Information Act • 7 CFR Part 1b – National Environmental Policy Act • 7 CFR Part 1c – Protection of Human Subjects • 7 CFR Part 1c.120 – Evaluation and disposition of applications and proposals for research to be

conducted or supported by a Federal Department or Agency • 7 CFR Part 3 – Debt Management • 7 CFR Part 15, subpart A – Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Program of the Department

of Agriculture • 42 CFR Part 73 – Select Agents and Toxins • Agriculture Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002, as implemented at 7 CFR part 331 and 9 CFR

part 121 • 31 U.S.C. 6101 note – Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 • 41 U.S.C. 6306 – Interest of Member of Congress • 42 U.S.C. 6962 Resource and Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) • 29 U.S.C. 794 (section 504, Rehabilitation Act of 1973), as implemented in 7 CFR Part 15b • 44 U.S.C. 3541 et seq. (Pub. L. 107-347) – Federal Information System Security Management

Act of 2002 • Executive order 13513, “Federal Leadership on Reducing Text Messaging While Driving”

8

• Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 (PL 80-544, as amended, 7 USC §§ 2131 et.seq.) • National Institutes of Health, DHHS, Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA

Molecules • 15 U.S.C. 205a et seq. “”the Metric Conversion Act as amended by the Omnibus Trade and

Competitiveness Act” • Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. §§ 1271 et seq.) • 41 U.S.C. 4304, specific costs not allowable, and 41 U.S.C. 4310, Proceeding costs not allowable • 41 U.S.C. § 4712, “The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989” • Environmental standards which may be prescribed pursuant to the following: (a) notification of

violating facilities pursuant to EO 11738; (b) protection of wetlands pursuant to EO 11990; (c) evaluation of flood hazards in floodplains in accordance with EO 11988; (d) assurance of project consistency with the approved State management program developed under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 USC §§ 1451 et seq.); (e) conformity of Federal actions to State (Clean Air) Implementation Plans under Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act of 1955, as amended (42 USC §§7401 et seq.); (t) protection of underground sources of drinking water under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended (PL 93-523); and (g) protection of endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (PL 93- 205. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 USC § 470), EO 11593 (identification and protection of historic properties), and the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (16 USC §§ 469a-1 et seq.) Titles II and III of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-646).

PART VI – AGENCY CONTACT For general questions related to the Food for Progress Program, all interested parties are encouraged to contact: Food Assistance Division Office of Capacity Building and Development Foreign Agricultural Service U.S Department of Agriculture Address 1400 Independence Ave, SW, STOP 1034 Washington, DC 20250 Phone: (202) 720-4221 Fax: (202) 690-0251 Email: ppded@fas.usda.gov

Individuals with questions regarding the Notice of Funding Opportunity must submit the questions in writing to the above email address. Answers to all questions regarding the Notice of Funding Opportunity will be posted on the FAIS homepage. FAS staff will not respond to questions that all not submitted to the above email address. The deadline for submitting questions for the Notice of Funding Opportunity is January 24, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST). If you do not have internet access, and would like access to the questions and answers, please contact the USDA at the number or address above, and provide your address or fax number. FAS will send you the questions and responses to all questions asked regarding the Notice of Funding Opportunity.

9

APPENDIX A – PRIORITY COUNTRIES AND REGIONS GUIDANCE

Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Peru (Andean and Central American Region) Submissions may target one or both of the two identified project sectors. Priority Sectors Cacao and Coffee Targeted Areas Cacao and coffee producing and processing regions in Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Peru Guidance FAS intends to extend its suite of investments in cacao and coffee in Latin America with a unique regional approach that leverages future private sector investments and augments research supporting local institutions for both sectors. Submissions that approach the regional scaling of interventions in a cost-effective manner will be viewed more favorably. While submissions must target interventions in the prioritized countries, FAS will require the submission to address research issues (e.g., areas such as strengthening and propagating varieties) and include collaboration with regional tropical research institutions and private sector actors, including those outside of the countries in the targeted region. Submissions should coordinate and/or collaborate with USAID and other relevant stakeholders.

The importance of cacao and coffee for both producing/export countries, in addition to consumer/import countries, can be demonstrated by examining regional trade with the United States. In 2015, for example, according to the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), the targeted countries exported close to $4 billion of cacao and coffee globally. With coffee, the U.S. private sector annually generates $74 billion of final retail value from $5.2 billion of imported green coffee. Estimates for the U.S. chocolate confectionery industry, fueled by import of cacao, totaled $22.4 billion in 2015.

There remain many serious challenges facing the future prospect of these cash-generating commodities including persistent diseases such as coffee leaf rust, coffee borer, witches broom, and frosty pod rot, which are leading to areas of production abandonment. Traditional growing areas for these two crops are changing and producers have struggled to determine appropriate growing altitudes for optimal production. For example, in global coffee production, it is estimated that four million hectares are in need of rehabilitation and renovation (R&R). 1 Adding to the challenge, all mitigation efforts must account for yield and quality before offering up any “silver bullet” variety or production technique. At the farm level, financing these R&R efforts can be equally difficult for smallholder and medium-sized farmers. Producers often find financial services to be inadequate for their needs, given the timeframe for harvesting coffee and cacao after making investments to their plots. Furthermore, smallholder producers

1 USAID Bureau for Food Security. Renovation & Rehabilitation for Resilient Coffee Farms: A Guidebook for Roasters, Traders and Supply Chain Partners: November 2017.

10

are prevented from doing renovation and rehabilitation of coffee and cacao lands because of its high cost and risk. Higher on the value chain, establishing market linkages remains a common gap in both cacao and coffee.

With each value chain, a strong national commodity institution is vital to promoting profitability for its producer members and in developing the competitiveness and commercialization of the sectors. Institutions like Anacafé (Asociación Nacional del Café) in Guatemala, or the Association of Cocoa Producers of Honduras (APROCACAHO) implement promotional programs, establish farmer field schools, facilitate varietal development, and provide extension services to members, including cooperatives. Yet, in both value chains throughout the selected region, the quality and profusion of association services differ widely.

Programming Priorities FAS seeks submissions that address the challenges presented above through the creation of a regional platform that will assist producers in renovation of their plots. Where private-sector support can be leveraged to extend and sustain an intervention, FAS seeks investments aimed at making improved genetic planting materials more available, as well as ensuring flexible finance needed to make renovations. In terms of marketing, FAS requests submissions that will help to develop cacao and coffee associations. In the context of the six priority countries, the viability of nurseries varies significantly, but the importance of strengthening the business case for improved nurseries is equally important to farmers who increasingly rely on improved varieties to ensure sufficient production. Professionalizing and upgrading the quality of nurseries and their products, including strengthening extension services that bring current research in an applied form to producers is key to making nursery investments sustainable and profitable. Farmers who would like to rehabilitate and renovate their cacao and coffee plots, regardless of their scale of production, face a daunting challenge -- finance. In many cases, financing resources are available for producers of all production sizes; however, ensuring that concessional loans attract both the financier and the borrower continues to be a challenge. FAS seeks an innovative mechanism for smoothing financial needs for farmers planning to access improved varieties in their effort to renovate across different scales of production. Where appropriate, proposed interventions, in either sector, also should support the capacity building of coffee and cacao promoting institutions, particularly where gaps remain in both the quality of services and cacao and coffee products provided and their organizational structure, preventing them from becoming sustainable and self-supported. When strengthening these institutions, side selling is reduced, financing initiatives gain more traction, and associations can scale up prior external investments. FAS seeks submissions that address the most urgent needs in capacity building for these organizations in a manner that will facilitate expanded trade in the associated supply chain. Creating a private sector-driven platform towards sustainable supply chains will complement the efforts of USDA, USAID, and other international donor development programs in cacao and coffee in the region. One example of private sector interest is the Sustainable Coffee Challenge, which has gathered a wide range of actors in the public and private sectors. For instance, the “One Tree for Every Bag

11

Commitment”2 initiative by Starbucks is an effort to help ensure the long term supply of coffee and the economic future of farmers. Another example is the Fine Chocolate Industry Association (FCIA) and its related Heirloom Cacao Preservation Fund efforts to help the public and private sectors increase the quality, yield, and resiliency of the fine flavor cacao for which the Latin American and Caribbean region is known. Submissions should explain interventions which engage with private sector and other supply chain actors that deliver R&R services, and provide farmer finance on the ground, and sustainable contracts.

2Conservation International: Starbucks’ One Tree for Every Bag Commitment Benefits Coffee Farmers, 2017

12

Cambodia

Priority Sector Aquaculture

Targeted Areas Regions of Cambodia conducive to freshwater fish farming Guidance Fish is the most important protein source for Cambodians, and there is strong consumer preference for freshwater fish.3 Currently, local aquaculture meets a relatively small share of this demand, 4 with the balance satisfied by Cambodia’s wild fisheries (including paddies) and substantial informal imports. Maximum sustainable production from wild fisheries is insufficient to meet consumer demand for freshwater fish, and there are concerns by consumers about the safety of unregulated imports. This indicates that there is likely substantial latent demand in Cambodia for quality-assured freshwater fish, extending to processed products including fish paste, fish sauce, dried fish, and smoked fish. This demand is likely to grow as per-capita incomes continue to rise (GDP growth rate has been 7 percent or more since at least 20145). Minimal population growth (1.52 percent6) and urbanization has led to rural labor shortages 7 that increase financial returns to agricultural modernization and intensification. Because Cambodia has a positive reputation among Southeast Asian countries for producing clean, freshwater fish, niche and high value export markets may also present opportunities.

The current capacity of Cambodia’s freshwater aquaculture sector is low, and growth is constrained by several factors. To address these, the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) has released a National Strategic Plan for Aquaculture Development in Cambodia 2016-2030 and made improving aquaculture a cornerstone of the country’s overall development policy. 8 The European Union (EU) is funding efforts through Cambodia’s public sector to address many of the sector’s constraints.9 This work will align closely with the RGC Strategic Plan and is expected to advance aquaculture-related scientific research, support public sector institutions, and improve extension services and data collection within an improved enabling environment.

The RGC’s Strategic Plan recognizes the central role of the private sector, but private enterprise in the sector is characterized by outmoded production methods, inefficient market linkages, informal business management, and minimal access to Cambodia’s well-capitalized finance sector. To close these gaps and achieve the necessary scale, the private sector requires technical assistance and market systems support. An FFPr project is well-suited to provide this support and would be positioned to leverage progress under the EU-funded work.

3 National Aquaculture Sector Overview 4 Ibid 5 CIA World Factbook 6 Ibid 7 USAID 2015, An Analysis of Three Commodity Value Chains in Cambodia 8 National Strategic Plan for Aquaculture Development in Cambodia 2016-2030 9 Action Document for Cambodia Programme for Sustainable and Inclusive Growth in the Fisheries Sector, 2016

13

Programming Priorities USDA requests submissions which outline activities that will make substantial contributions to the highest level strategic objective of increasing agriculture production and expanding trade of agricultural products (domestic, regional and international). USDA has identified freshwater aquaculture as a priority sector in Cambodia in 2018. An FFPr project should employ a market facilitation approach and focus on the private sector. The project strategy should be informed by market analyses that weigh opportunities for adding value, increasing production and marketing efficiencies, and/or capturing quality premiums in the fresh market and/or fish processing, and project activities should be directed by needs assessments that identify priorities. To address production, the project should build farmer capacity on applicable topics, such as fish farming, farm and business management, and financial literacy. To address trade, the project should build and expand linkages among input providers, farmers, traders, processors, and financial institutions. In addition, the project should strengthen enterprises that produce quality seed, fries, and fingerlings, and may support other entities that provide critical inputs and services to the sector. The project should only support safe, quality-assured production. In anticipation of dynamic growth and market-driven private sector investments, the project should employ adaptive management principles.

FFPr-funded capacity building and market facilitation activities among producers, traders, processors, input providers, financial institutions, and other entities must leverage early scientific advances and public sector capacity building supported by the EU. A potential FFPr project should coordinate closely with the Cambodian Fisheries Administration and engage directly with the EU-funded initiatives in the aquaculture sector. The project should build on the successes of other donor projects in freshwater aquaculture to avoid redundant efforts. Successful submissions will acknowledge that high volumes of low quality fish are likely to remain in the marketplace for the duration of the project, and entities therefore must identify realistic approaches for the sector to capture quality premiums. The project should also facilitate consistent access to sustainable feed sources for fish farms.

14

Egypt

Submissions should target only one of the two identified project sectors.

Priority Sector Food Safety

Targeted Areas Countrywide Guidance On January 10, 2017, Egypt established the National Food Safety Authority (NFSA) through Public Law 1/2017. The NFSA will consolidate the Egyptian food safety system under one roof. This is a significant development as there are currently 17 government agencies trying to enforce over 120 food safety-related regulations. The multitude of agencies and laws creates significant inefficiencies and gaps that need to be addressed through the provision of technical assistance and infrastructure support. Programming Priorities USDA seeks to fund a program that will improve NFSA’s ability to conduct science-based risk assessments, monitor Egyptian food safety systems, reduce foodborne illnesses and manage outbreaks, implement proper inspection and certification systems, and harmonize policies and practices with the world trading system. Priority Sector Cold Chain for Tilapia Production

Targeted Regions Regions around the Nile River conducive to fish farming Guidance Globally, aquaculture is a vital industry that provides essential low-cost animal protein to a rapidly growing population. According to the State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture report, published in 2016 by FAO, fish accounts for almost 17 percent of the global population’s protein intake, while the fishing industry supports the livelihoods of about 12 percent of the world’s population. As such, the aquaculture industry plays a critical role in world food security. This quickly-growing sector is being fueled in large part by a growing aqua-feed sector. Egyptian aquaculture ranks tenth in world production and second in the production of tilapia. Since the 1990s, tilapia has become the most important aquaculture species for Egypt with a total harvest of over 1.2 million metric tons in 2016, which represents more than 75 percent of the total aquaculture harvest. Smallholder producer rely on tilapia in their agricultural systems, which account for over 80 percent of total production, which contributes to the sector’s stellar growth rate of seven percent annually. It has also been advantageous for consumers, as tilapia is the cheapest and most widely consumed animal protein source in Egypt, with an estimated annual consumption rate of 20 kg per person, compared to 13 kg of poultry meat. Despite its success, the industry lacks cold chain infrastructure, leading to many

15

inefficiencies, since the fish must be sold within hours of harvest or face spoilage, thus reducing producers’ incomes.

Programming Priorities USDA seeks submissions that are focused on establishing a network of cold chains in the Nile Delta where the bulk of small farmers operate and where the necessary infrastructure of roads, electricity, and functioning markets are available. The proposed interventions should strengthen and develop cold chain links and business skills from post-harvest processing, transportation, to retail; expand the capacity and commercial orientation of industry organizations and cooperatives; promote the development of cold chain infrastructure; increase consumer awareness about the food safety and nutritional benefits of using cold chain; and improving the enabling environment for cold chain operators through a harmonized system and enforcement of regulations.

16

Republic of Georgia

Priority Sectors Dual Purpose Livestock: Dairy and Beef Targeted Regions Regions of Georgia conducive to dairy and beef production Guidance In 2014, Georgia signed the Association and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements (DCFTA) with European Union (EU) which requires that local businesses meet EU regulations as defined in the DCFTA by 2020. The Republic of Georgia is realigning its regulations to align with the DCFTA and the United States seeks to ensure that the new regulations do not inhibit international trade or access to the Georgian market. Updated regulations in line with international standards can help increase opportunities for Georgia to strengthen its food safety system and ensure small and medium farmers, who make up a significant portion of the rural areas, can meet these regulations. Specifically, Georgia will need to create an efficient system for food safety management (including animal and plant health systems) and traceability at production, processing, and distribution of agricultural products. For example, under current Georgian legislation, it will become necessary for business operators to undertake food safety procedures in compliance with international standards, including using hazard analysis and critical points (HAACP) systems. Although there are many farmers involved in dairy farming in Georgia, the majority of milk consumed in the country and used as an input for the processing sector is in the form of milk powder imported primarily from Russia and Ukraine. Of these dairy farmers, few are registered and meet HAACP requirements with the rest selling their dairy products in informal markets and at the household level. Processing capacity, milk collection and cold storage systems, and slaughterhouses are also not efficient or in adherence with international standards. Furthermore, local and regional facilities will need to meet additional regulations and inspections in the coming years and will need technical assistance to upgrade their facilities and processes to be in compliance with new regulations. The U.S. Government has committed its strong support to the Republic of Georgia to promote a cooperatives or trade associations approach. Although the Georgian government is already promoting cooperatives through the Agricultural Cooperatives Development Agency (ACDA) but many farmers are reluctant to be part of a cooperative due to negative experiences during the Soviet era. Despite this fact, there are a handful of active dairy associations. New investments in animal identification and established national coordination on animal health through the National Animal Health Program Steering Committee support an enabling environment for investment in these sectors. Programming Priorities Submissions should identify key regions that will have the greatest impact on the quality and safety of the dairy and meat sectors. The resulting interventions should facilitate access to credit, risk management instruments, and market information for market-oriented medium sized cattle farmers and organizations. Supporting interventions should improve milk and beef safety and quality through implementing on-farm

17

best practices in management, including feed, health and veterinary services, and improved genetics. Submissions should indicate interventions which build the capacity of cattle farmers and milk processors to adhere to the international, science-based standards for milk and dairy products by improve sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) systems and measures and HAACP/food safety compliance and control measures. These interventions should work to expand the technical expertise, capacity and commercial orientation of dairy organizations and cooperatives, and enhance the marketing capacity of producers and processors, including developing niche products for domestic consumption. Submissions should also build the capacity of input and service suppliers to the livestock sector including feed producers, veterinary services, and pasture management. Submissions should address issues relating to storage and handling and specifically work to promote the development of cold chain infrastructure. Furthermore, submissions should demonstrate how the projects will collaborate with the Animal Health Steering Group, National Food Agency and the Ministry of Agriculture, as well as existing USDA and USAID programs. Submissions should indicate specific topics for technical assistance and support to dairy processors and slaughterhouses to upgrade facilities and processes to comply with new food safety regulations.

18

Kenya

Submissions should target only one of the two identified project sectors.

Priority Sector Agricultural Irrigation

Targeted Areas Regions of Kenya conducive to agricultural irrigation improvements

Guidance Increased incidence of drought and other weather events in recent years has negatively affected Kenya’s agriculture production, in turn limiting the country’s growth potential. Population growth has increased the need to derive more value from land and water, adding considerable pressure to these natural resources. In rural Kenya, households and businesses derive incomes from rain-fed agriculture, which allows for one, or at most two, growing seasons. This limits earning potential and leaves the agriculture sector vulnerable to weather shocks.

To address these concerns and to increase food production, the Government of Kenya (GOK) has prioritized and developed a strategy for irrigation. This policy is implemented by the National Irrigation Board (NIB), which assesses, designs, and constructs irrigation schemes and provides capacity building throughout the country. This includes building and managing large-scale endeavors such as the Galana-Kulalu Food Security Project, as well as constructing small- and medium-sized schemes to be handed over to communities, cooperatives and enterprises. Unfortunately, many of these projects are unfunded, in part because the GOK’s budget has been stretched by drought and humanitarian response.

Programming Priorities A submission that addresses irrigation should focus on small and medium-sized projects that demonstrate strong potential for sustainably expanding agricultural production and trade. In this role, the entity will act as a steward of USDA funds directed toward priority projects within the NIB’s substantial pipeline of vetted small-and medium-sized irrigation projects. Entities may work closely with NIB to leverage, not duplicate, its technical and capacity building expertise. To date, only ten percent of Kenya’s three million acres of irrigable land is being utilized. According to the Tegemeo Institute of Agricultural Policy and Development in Kenya, irrigation has the potential to increase food output by approximately 100-400 percent.

Priority Sector Agricultural Commodity Storage

Targeted Areas Regions of Kenya conducive to improved food safety and post-harvest storage

Guidance Improved storage infrastructure and practices could have significant positive impacts on both Kenya’s agriculture sector and food security. Proper storage conserves product quality and delays degradation and spoiling. In staple crops like grains, it protects against damage caused by microorganisms, insects, and rodents, and ensures the availability of seeds for future crop cycles. In the case of processed frozen

19

products, it ensures safety and quality; guarantees regular and continuous supply of raw materials for industry; and balances the supply and demand of agricultural products, thereby stabilizing market prices. The GOK, through the National Cereals and Produce Board (NCPB), helps farmers preserve their grain for a fee either on the Board’s premises or on farm, if storage structures are suitable and safe. However, both storage infrastructure and management skills remain a challenge. Kenya also suffers from aflatoxin contamination; the submissions should consider mechanisms to address this. The cold chain in Kenya has also developed unevenly. Existing cold chains in Kenya are vertically integrated to address the needs of specific industries (i.e., the flower industry) and are inaccessible to the majority of producers and agribusinesses.10 Likewise, food safety standards for exports follow international best practices, while products destined for local consumption encounter temperature abuse at all links of the cold chain. Programming Priorities Entities may propose strategies that will improve the management and operations of existing dry storage infrastructure and expand and increase access to commercially-viable cold chain operations in Kenya.

For both cold and dry storage, strategies may include interventions that increase the capacity and commercial orientation of industry organizations and cooperatives as possible operators of storage facilities. Entities may complement improved management of storage facilities by strengthening and developing links and business skills across the supply chain, including post-harvest processing, transportation, and retail. Interventions that seek to develop Kenya’s cold chain specifically may increase cold storage capacity across value chains (i.e., high-value crops, staple crops, and dairy), increase consumer awareness about the food safety and nutritional benefits of using appropriate cold storage; and improve the enabling environment for cold chain operators through a harmonized system and enforcement of regulations.

10 Global Cold Chain Alliance, 2016

20

Pakistan

Submissions should target only one of the two identified project sectors.

Priority Sector Aquaculture

Targeted Areas Regions with high potential for increased marine and freshwater fish (including shellfish and mollusk) production Guidance Although per capita fish consumption in Pakistan is low, fisheries and aquaculture play an important role in the country’s economy, with annual exports of fish and fishery products totaling more than $260 million. 11 Marine capture comprises most fish production (56 percent of the sector), followed by aquaculture production (23 percent), and inland capture (21 percent), respectively. Inland fishing is typically subsistence in nature, whereas marine capture fisheries include commercial scale operations. There is large potential for growth in aquaculture, despite vast marine and freshwater resources. Aquaculture production is limited; a lack of commercial feed, non-centralized disease monitoring, and low quality fish seed and broodstocks are notable constraints limiting the sector. 12 Opportunities exist in improving postharvest and general handling practices, marketing capacity, feed quality and availability, and extension services. Interventions in aquaculture and fisheries can build on prior USDA programming, such as “FEEDing Pakistan”, a project that increased aquaculture productivity and conducted soy-based feeding trials with the Fisheries Development Board (FDB). Programming Priorities Submissions should identify regions favorable for increased production and trade based on economic viability, existing production systems, capability for new production systems, and potential to improve market access. Submissions should coordinate and/or collaborate with USAID, Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (PARC), and other relevant stakeholders. Submissions which concentrate on the fish and marine sector should include interventions that provide capacity building to aquaculture value chain actors (including input providers, medium and smallholder farmers, and processors), improve food safety standards and quality certifications, expand availability and quality of fish feed, and improve the enabling environment of and access to quality input and veterinary services.

11 “Fishery and Aquaculture Country Profiles: The Islamic Republic of Pakistan.” FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. 12 Overview of Aquaculture Sector: Inland and Marine Aquaculture in Pakistan. Iftikhar, Faisal. (Esquire-Squid) Fisheries and Development Board.

21

Priority Sector Livestock Feed Targeted Regions Regions favorable for expanded and improved production of livestock feed sector Guidance Livestock is a very significant economic sector—millions of buffaloes, cattle, sheep, goats, camels, poultry, and other animal herds contribute over 10 percent of the national gross domestic product (GDP). Presently, Pakistan’s livestock feedstocks are insufficient, and feed production is estimated to be 30 percent short of needs. Yet, there is strong potential to expand the feed industry to include non-traditional feed resources and increase access to inputs for poultry and dairy nutrition and animal health requirements. 13 The provision of adequate nutrition is considered the most important factor to increasing Pakistani livestock production, and growth in the poultry industry has been limited by high feed prices and poor feed quality. 14,15 Opportunities exist to provide training on increasing non-traditional feed resources, build the capacity of cooperatives, and improve access to feed inputs. Activities focused on building feedstocks and improving animal health can leverage prior USAID dairy interventions and link with the ongoing USDA partnership with Pakistan’s University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences. Programming Priorities Submissions should identify regions favorable for increased production and trade based on economic viability, existing production systems, capability for new production systems, and potential to improve market access. Submissions should coordinate and/or collaborate with USAID, Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (PARC), and other relevant stakeholders. In the livestock feed sector, submissions should emphasize interventions that advance the sector through developing the feed ingredient supply chain and feed manufacturing enterprises; improving sustainable forage production systems; introducing and expanding feedlot, poultry, and dairy enterprises; and promoting improved on-farm feeding practices.

13 “Livestock and Poultry Sectors in Pakistan.” Afzal, M. Pakistan Agricultural Research Council. 14 “Feed Resources of Livestock in Punjab, Pakistan.” Younas, M. and Yaqoob, M. University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. 15 “An Overview of Poultry Industry in Pakistan.” Hussain, J.; Rabbani, I.; Aslam, S.; and Ahmad, H.A. World’s Poultry Science Journal.

22

The Philippines Submissions should target only one of the two identified project sectors. Priority Sector Aquaculture Targeted Areas Regions favorable for the production of farmed lobster, crustaceans, and other high-value fish and marine products demanded by urban domestic and international markets

Guidance Since 2013, Food for Progress has been engaged in the aquaculture sector in the Philippines in the Caraga region. 16 Project activities have supported lobster farmers by connecting producers to domestic and regional markets, and increasing production through facilitating access to finance and conducting technical capacity building trainings. FAS intends to expand upon previous interventions to a different target geographic areas while fostering production systems that are environmentally sustainable and support improved security in the region.

Philippine lobster producers have benefitted in recent years by growing demand from China, a type of “affordable” luxury product desired by its growing middle class. 17 Since 2009, Chinese lobster imports have more than doubled. Similar trends are witnessed in South Korea, where imports have grown from $5 million in 2010 to $28 million in 2016. 18

Yet, lobster production has its environmental costs. Producers have scoured mangrove forests for trash fish and crustaceans to feed lobsters and have depopulated ecosystems that are vital to regulating and regenerating maritime populations and which protect coastal communities from storm surges. Furthermore, despite high current prices, the international lobster market is extremely volatile, punctuated by periodic crashes due to macroeconomic trends or oversupply, most recently witnessed in 2012. 19 Market volatility, along with high lobster fingerling prices and a long lobster maturation period, makes production a risky endeavor for producers. Programming Priorities Submissions should identify key regions for increased sustainable production using a scientific approach based on economic viability, existing production systems, and a potential for access to markets. The submissions should strongly emphasize interventions that support production systems that are both environmentally sustainable and economically viable. Furthermore, interventions may help producing communities become more resilient to natural disasters while building these sustainable production systems.

16 Region XIII comprises four provinces, Agusan del Norte, Agusan del Sur, Surigao del Norte and Surigao del Sur. 17 Bloomberg, 2017 18 Bloomberg 19 New York Times. 2012

23

Interventions may address access to finance for producers, but more broadly may include strategies for household to mitigate the risks associated with these production systems. Submissions may include a close collaboration with the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR), the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), provincial and Local Governments Units (LGUs), and other stakeholders. Collaboration could increase the capacity of government agencies to provide extension, assist in marketing, and to enforce environmental regulations. Priority Sector Coffee Targeted Areas Coffee growing regions that would benefit from improved production, quality, post-harvest handling, aggregation and marketing. Guidance The Philippines ranks last in total production among the world’s top 25 coffee producers.20 Farm-level yields are also low, at 636 kg/ha, less than half of other major coffee producing countries.21 Despite low domestic production, there is vast demand for coffee in the Philippines, which ranks fourth globally in coffee consumption and first in imports of soluble coffee, with six million kilograms of instant coffee entering the country last year. 22 Furthermore, a rapidly growing population and stronger middle class have increased demand for higher quality coffee. Obstacles to growing coffee production include old and unproductive trees, quality coffee genetics, a lack of farmer organization, access to finance, and limited knowledge in grading and marketing. Despite these challenges, the Philippines has favorable conditions for the production of specialty coffee, including high-elevation upland slopes. 23 High global demand for robusta coffee also presents an opportunity for producers at lower elevations. Programming Priorities Food for Progress seeks interventions that target existing coffee producing regions with high potential for increasing production and quality. Entities may propose separate strategies for specialty coffee and robusta coffees. Submissions may include interventions that increase the quality and productivity of coffee in the Philippines, which include establishment of nurseries to introduce new varietals for renovation of existing farms, rehabilitation of old trees, and interventions that improve post-harvest handling and processing. Submissions may also address the financial constraints facing both producers and nurseries. Submissions may include interventions to improve the marketability of Philippine coffee and increase access to domestic and international markets, including the United States. To that end, submissions may also include strategies for collaboration with relevant public and private sector stakeholders.

20 USDA Coffee: World Markets and Trade Report, June 2017 21 Philippine Statistics Authority, 2016 22 USDA Coffee: World Markets and Trade Report, June 2017 23 Garrity, Kummer, and Guiang, 1993

24

Tunisia

Submissions should target only one of the two identified project sectors.

Priority Sector Aquaculture

Targeted Areas Regions of Tunisia conducive to freshwater fish farming Guidance Fisheries and aquaculture play an important role as source of food and foreign currency in Tunisia. In 2016, aquaculture production totaled 15,200 metric tons (MT), accounting for 12 percent of Tunisia’s total fisheries production, and employing over 2,000 workers. Per capita domestic consumption of fish coming from both aquaculture and wild catch slightly decreased from 14 kg in 1988 to 12 kg in recent years. However, the per capita consumption hides a large disparity between coastal regions and interior regions, where per capita consumption in the interior is only 1.5 kg. While the Government of Tunisia (GOT) emphasizes the fry production in its 2020 development plan, the Fisheries Association (FA), in its 2016 survey, views the lack of processing capacity, marketing, and export opportunities as the main challenges for the sector24.

Programming Priorities Submissions should describe commercially-viable strategies for developing the aquaculture value chain in Tunisia that takes into consideration the GOT’s development goals of improving input supplies (i.e., fry production, feed, etc.), processing and job creation. Submissions should illustrate strategies to improve institutional capacity to create an enabling environment for all stakeholders along the value chain, including farmers, traders, processors, and consumers. Submissions should describe research and extension capacity interventions, leading to the uptake of good agricultural practices, improving production and post-harvest handling, enhancing the ability to detect and eradicate diseases, etc. Submissions should have interventions which improve linkages between farmers and the marketplace through access to credit, risk management instruments or other appropriate means. Finally, a program should facilitate linkages and collaboration with broad-based partnerships and initiatives aimed at supporting the development of the entire aquaculture value chain – from inputs and disease control to farm management, processing, and market access. Priority Sector Citrus Targeted Areas Regions of Tunisia conducive to citrus production 24 USDA/FAS: GAIN Report TS1705

25

Guidance Tunisia's citrus sector includes 12,000 farmers, with 70 percent of farms under two hectares, as well as 14 conditioning plants. Maltese oranges, navel oranges, clementines, lemons and mandarins are the primary citrus crops grown in Tunisia. Production increased during the last ten years from 300 thousand MT in 2007/08, to a record high of 560 thousand MT in 2016/17, due to expanded citrus production and favorable weather conditions. However, a significant amount of aged citrus trees still exist, requiring improved nurseries, genetics, and agricultural practices. Tunisian citrus exports are approximately five percent of its production; but the GOT’s goal is to double citrus exports by 2025. Most citrus are consumed fresh and 70 percent of the citrus arrives to the final consumer through informal marketing channels while the remainder is captured by the wholesale market. Approximately 5,000 MT of oranges were unconsumed and lost in 2016/17, due to weak domestic demand and export bottlenecks. Excluding a few local small-scale producers, Tunisia lacks significant commercial processing facilities. The lack of processing capacity, coupled with poor cold storage infrastructure, hinders Tunisia’s ability to export and maintain a stable supply of citrus off-season.

Programming Priorities FAS seeks submissions that include strategies to improve citrus production through the rehabilitation of aging trees, increasing access to improved planting materials, enhancing the ability to detect and eradicate diseases, and upgrading irrigation systems. Furthermore, submissions should include describe activities which increase cold storage capacity, reducing post-harvest loss, processing, and marketing capacity of commercial entities and industry organizations, as well as opportunities for more employment. Entities should explain how linkages will be improved between farmers and the marketplace, including financing strategies such as access to credit, improved risk management instruments, and other appropriate means. Furthermore, submissions should include interventions that provide linkages and collaboration with broad-based partnerships and initiatives aimed at supporting the development of the entire value chain – from inputs and disease control to farm management and market access. Submissions may also include strategies that promote domestic consumption of citrus.

26

APPENDIX B – FOOD FOR PROGRESS RESULTS FRAMEWORKS

27